Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Legacy (Game Over)

[Kise]

Just curious.. would a hydra ever work between us, Mastin? I don't think we're ever on the same street. Although, I was scum in our previous 2 games.

[Tammy]

Although that message you sent Tammy would have got you power lynched if I were her : P

I thought it was zabriel though and it fit with his general demeanor. I don't know how I would have felt in game once I learned it was Mykonian and could ask him some questions.

[Tammy]

Look, if you and AP want to pretend like you guys played super pro-town and that no one suspected you, fine. But Tammy is a smart girl. If Tammy was not lynched she would have eventually shot AP and probably you. If I were the SK I would have shot you and AP so you know luck and all that. Also thanks for the kind words , Mastin.

<3

[mastin2]

Just curious.. would a hydra ever work between us, Mastin? I don't think we're ever on the same street. Although, I was scum in our previous 2 games.

I actually coordinate REALLY well with my hydra partners. (Except when I draw scum. In which case, I let them take control, as I suck as scum. )

From Nacho to Lat/MT to Oversoul to Pine (WHEN HE ACTUALLY DOES HIS PART /grumblegrumblepalisadeisacursedhydra ) to Twistedspoon to AP.

Heck, I almost got to be the honorary hydra with Nero this game, even though it didn't quite work out that way. (His reads were good, but his charisma was lacking. Having my charisma would have helped him potentially push it through.)

A huge part of it is having a QT to coordinate (remember, I like to talk in my QTs...a lot ), but also actually knowing that the person you're talking to has the exact same role PM, and therefore does not possess an ulterior motive. And knowing that they share your alignment, that they're legitimate in what they're posting...it actually allows for a LOT of coordination.

There will always be hydra dissonance, but I'm generally the kind of guy who when experiencing dissonance will let my partner's reads dominate, at least while I go to check out the reasons why they have them.

[Nero Cain]

I blame myself a lot for this game. I think if I had not lost my computer at home and was able to yell and scream more at AP/Myko

AND

talk more in the QT then this game may have been different.

Also Mastin hasn't made up a good hydra name yet.

[mastin2]

Also Mastin hasn't made up a good hydra name yet.

I really can't think of anything good.

Pretty much every single hydra I've been in has been named at least partially (or entirely) by the other half. Calcifer was made well before my time, Horrifying Hero (or was it Horrific Hero?) was Lat's idea, Ovstin was Timeater's name, BirdAndBeast was AP's idea, and the one I most got involved with was Palisade. ('Cause, y'know, pun. Pine is a wood, I'm known for walls, and a palisade is a wooden wall. ) Even then, he made the final call.

I am not very name-inclined.

[Cheery Dog]

Good hydra names exist?
My only one so far has been Cherry Nog. (which at one stage was just going be Cherry Dog for extra confusion with me)

[Thor665]

"Hé be obvtown as scum as well, so that's not really the problem. It's the fact that he's a replacement with a brain. "

Daaaaaw - I lurv you too Myrk

[Nero Cain]

even before my modkill.

I kinda disliked the modkill. I can kinda understand the thinkin' behind it but on the other hand it was public knowledge so...

luck and all that.

Seriously Nero?

yes

Look, if you and AP want to pretend like you guys played super pro-town and that no one suspected you, fine. But Tammy is a smart girl. If Tammy was not lynched she would have eventually shot AP and probably you. If I were the SK I would have shot you and AP so you know luck and all that. Also thanks for the kind words , Mastin.

Told you. Suspected isn't the point. Not getting lynched is. I've been suspected all game.

I haven't been close to a lynch

. So yes, I kinda feel like I had a good run this game.

Tammy would have shot AP soon enough if we read the death topic.

Both you and AP escaped many lynches. I think you got close to being lynched one day but I'm too lazy to go back and look.

I was incredibly sad when Thor was shot.

[mykonian]

yeah, those are the best arguments. "too lazy to look" my ass. Everybody can ctrl-f pappums. Never more then 3 votes.

I killed you with all love, thor

[pidgey]

Thing with myk was that he was so obnoxious that I thought no one could be that much of an asshole as scum, lol

Thats what kinda made me doubt my scum read

[pidgey]

BTW im up for another large theme whenever that is happening. Not signed up in any game right now but dont want to replace either due to time.

Im also planning to host a Phoenix Wright game but i have to tweek that a whole lot.

[The Baltimore Sun]

I kinda disliked the modkill. I can kinda understand the thinkin' behind it but on the other hand it was public knowledge so...

That's not a reason to not modkill someone, though? The reason was the slot was compromised beyond repair once it was public knowledge. and the post in the QT was very clear. Mastin bringing it up and not thinking he'd be modkilled is bizzare.

[mastin2]

Mastin bringing it up and not thinking he'd be modkilled is bizzare.

I explained my reasoning in the dead QT pretty clearly.

Basically, I presented Cyber's post not as a means to clear myself, but as something to augment the already-existing defenses I had made. Not as some undeniable proof that I was town. (And as also commented in the dead QT, it clearly wasn't as explicit as some people think it was, given pidgey's reaction. He didn't buy it. He wasn't sold. He wanted further proof. Heck, if memory serves, Nero wasn't immediately convinced, either. He ultimately was, but he hesitated.)

The weakness was in the presentation, as I also explained in the dead QT. The intention of it was to bring it up and explain why it supported (key word: SUPPORTED, not proved) I was town...while also giving alternative explanations, explaining why it didn't explicitly clear me, why it wasn't undeniable proof, why I could be scum.

[mastin2]

And since I know you guys are too lazy to actually track the messages down...

Spoiler: Have them for your convenience

The way I saw it:

-The knowledge was public. It was there for all to view. Cybertronix was the one who released the mafia QT; I had no knowledge of that post before he released the QT for that game to be viewed.

-I may have been the one to point it out, but there was a significant chance it'd be brought up, anyway--I had linked to that game, for reading, and anyone who chose to look at the mafia QT would have seen it. More importantly, AP, who was voting me, was in the game with Cyber as scum, and would have been interested in reading the mafia QT--where he would have seen that post, and realized its implication for this game. It might not have been made explicit, but it would have compromised the gamestate all the same, influencing AP's decision.

-And most importantly, the knowledge didn't explicitly clear me. It gave strong evidence supporting that I was town, but it's not something impossible to fake. Cyber could have posted that in multiple scum games for all I know, as it'd be a good way to get tips on improving scum play.


-Basically, the knowledge was there, public, and in view. There was nothing that was my doing from it. Cyber made that post. Should he have, no, he really shouldn't have, but he did. And that post, when that game ended and he released the QT, strongly implied I was town this game. I pointed it out, and said that it strongly implied I was town, but was using it not to clear my slot undeniably, but to augment the evidence already present that I was town, as any other meta would.

What was I supposed to do, not point it out at all despite having seen it and known it was now public information for viewing? The game in question was over, the QT in question had been released, and any who sought to track down, say, Cyber's (previously nonexistent) scum meta, would have seen it.



Heck, it compromised me once I saw it. I already knew I was town, but I knew the implications of the post when I read it. There was no way that my play in the game wouldn't have been influenced by that post, and I was the player replacing him.


In other words, a lot of what I said in 4161--I was town, I knew I was town, I had presented an argument for me being town (one based off of my play in this game), and augmented it with a piece of public knowledge easily available to find, which reinforced (but didn't prove) I was town.

I didn't use it to clear me; I already knew I was town, after all. I presented it for others to view, and they're the ones who actually cleared me off of it, when I said that it didn't explicitly do so. I was using it as a towntell/townslip from my predecessor.

Heck, pidgey even asked around to see if Cyber had any other scum games, since he was clearly showing doubt. It supported me being town, and was strongly doing so, but was not explicitly doing so.



(That said, though, I don't disagree with the modkill. I mean, to me, personally, the evidence wasn't too strong. I didn't intend for it to clear me; I meant for it to be used to augment what I had already presented*. To others, they ignored my disclaimer about it not explicitly clearing me and took it for granted that I was--and with that in play, with me "cleared" by an outside influence to the game, a modkill is not too unreasonable. Once Cyber released that QT, it was probably going to happen even if I didn't point it out, since SOMEONE would have seen it, and realized what it meant, and realized what it'd do to the game.

It's not how I woulda handled the modkill, since the town's being punished for the actions of a player who left the game ten game phases ago--no, seriously; Cyber was replaced by Day Two, and the town lost their lynch for his QT posts in another game on Day Seven, five game days and many months later. Personally, I woulda just kept the day going with my slot removed.
Something like, "Cyber, retroactively modkilled Day 7, for a violation of rule 1**.
mastin2, his replacement, removed from the game Day 7.")



*Basically, "I'm town. I know I'm town, but I need to convince you that I'm town. And I am, for this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this." with the final "this" being Cyber's QT posts.

The presentation wasn't perfect, since I didn't do a good enough job of showing the opposite side, that it could be "that, that, that, that, that, that, that, and that.", with the final "that" being an alternative explanation for Cyber--that he posts that in all his scum games, that he meant completed games, that he simply forgot he was in this game altogether, etc.
But that was my intention--to show an argument for why I'm town, and explain why it could be that I wasn't, even though I was.


**That is the rule broken, no? Cyber (albeit accidentally) gave info about this game with his post in that game's mafia QT. He indirectly referred to this game outside of the game thread for this game.



Cyber, in a mafia QT, stated in that QT, that game was his first scum game on MS. The game in question started well after this one, and the post well after he had replaced out, but all the same, the post was there.
Cyber was also the player who released the QT to the public.

As such, the fact that he had not been scum before in any of his previous games (this one included) was made public knowledge.

I, having replaced Cyber, unfortunately have to take the fallout for his actions.

As such, the only option available was a modkill.
So I was.

It seems that games I started in 2013 mark a first time for quite a lot of things, including the first time I've ever been modkilled.

And the day ended 'cause of the modkill.

Soyeah, if three scum live, they won; if two scum live, tomorrow's mylo again, with one extra body here.


With that knowledge public, not much else could be done. I was compromised just by having seen that post. (I can explain why I was compromised by it in more detail if you'd like.)

[Kublai Khan]

What was I supposed to do, not point it out at all despite having seen it and known it was now public information for viewing?

Yes, absolutely yes. Because what you did was cheating. You cleared yourself through information that wasn't thread generated.

On the slim chance that anyone in the game had checked out that link and discovered that you were town through information not present in the game thread, then they should have notified the mod and gotten replaced.

If any of your other "I'm town" links were actually worth a crap and you honestly believed that they would convince anyone that you were town, then you wouldn't have included that Cyber link.

Cyber unwittingly broke site rules, but you used that to your advantage in a game. You deserved the modkill.

[Kublai Khan]

Also, unrelated, but I nommed myk for a title on this game.

[Nero Cain]

That's not a reason to not modkill someone, though? The reason was the slot was compromised beyond repair once it was public knowledge. and the post in the QT was very clear. Mastin bringing it up and not thinking he'd be modkilled is bizzare.

no, I get it now. Kinda blows that the whole town got punished for it.

[mastin2]

What was I supposed to do, not point it out at all despite having seen it and known it was now public information for viewing?

Yes, absolutely yes. Because what you did was cheating. You cleared yourself through information that wasn't thread generated.

On the slim chance that anyone in the game had checked out that link and discovered that you were town through information not present in the game thread, then they should have notified the mod and gotten replaced.

If any of your other "I'm town" links were actually worth a crap and you honestly believed that they would convince anyone that you were town, then you wouldn't have included that Cyber link.

Cyber unwittingly broke site rules, but you used that to your advantage in a game. You deserved the modkill.

Except that there were people in the game, who were checking out that thread. AP among them. He could have seen that link, and it would have influenced him. (Yes, he was scum, making it less likely that it'd influence him, but 1: it still could have, and 2: I didn't know he was scum, and if he were town, it DEFINITELY would have. Which brings me to point 3, in that if he hadn't been influenced, I would have, via me knowing he wasn't influenced. I could ask a simple question like "Hey, AP, did ya read the QTs for that game?" And if AP answered yes, with his vote still on me, I'd have known he was scum--see below.)

I had already referenced that game before, and posting a link to said game, when said game's mafia QT had been released, would have also increased the likelihood of Nero having found it.

Furthermore, the important factor here is that I knew about it. I saw it. I knew it was public information. I knew anyone who cared to was capable of tracking it down. I had seen it. How can I consciously, having seen evidence which strongly suggests I'm town, completely block that evidence from my own mind? Yes, I was the one with the role PM, yes, I already knew I was town, but...I also knew there was something strengthening my argument that anyone who chose to could find.

Hence, why I myself was compromised. I directly posted the link to the mafia QT from that game, but the knowledge could have just as easily been brought to the game, by me saying to check out Cyber's completed games, showing a bunch of irrelevant town games and his single extremely relevant scum game.

I knew that he had posted it, and once I knew, there was no way to completely block that. Deep-down, I'd have known, always known, that there was that post. And even if I could avoid mentioning Cyber's completed games, even if I went out of my way to cover up the knowledge I had learned, I'd have still possessed that knowledge, and known that it helped solidify my slot as being town. Even if left unpointed out, it would have changed my approach to the game, by making me take an entirely different angle.

Not only that, but actively hiding that you have outside knowledge is itself a bad thing. I knew the knowledge. I had it. It's not nearly as bad as learning another player's role, but it has much the same compromising effect. I knew something, which if I replaced into, say, pidgey's slot (which very, VERY easily could have happened, mind you!), would have been equally as bad. Yet this wasn't some super-secret inside knowledge that only I could have. It was public, and anyone who cared to look could find it.

What could the mod do in that situation, force-replace anyone who read that piece of info? When said info was in a very relevant game? It wasn't hidden. Anyone could see it, especially those who were in the game it happened in, and it applied to anyone who would have done their research.


That's one of the main reasons I didn't disagree with the modkill. It was a tricky situation, because of the info being publicly available. There was no way to hide the information. Even if it was from others, then there was no way to hide it from myself. I saw what I saw.


And as I said before, I was not using it to clear myself. If I actually thought that info would clear me, I wouldn't have posted it. (I'd have PM'd the mod about it.) There were many, many ways to write it off. There were many, many ways it could have been interpreted differently. There were many, many ways it could have been a lie. I, personally, knew it wasn't, but for all other people would be concerned, it could have been a complete and total fabrication.

Really, how come you seem to think it was so explicit? That Cyber's words could only be interpreted in that single way? I, the guy in the slot of question, thought of at least half a dozen ways for it to be false, yet only a single scenario for it to be true. I, the guy in the slot of question, didn't think that the single scenario was undeniably the most probable. He could have, for instance, merely forgotten he was ever in this game. It's happened to plenty of scummers before. He could have lied for the sake of maintaining his slot's integrity this game. Why was the answer "he was telling the truth" the only one people other than me considered?

As I said in the dead QT, I already thought my argument for me being town was strong. The link was meant to be the final nail in the coffin. To augment the existing case. Not the centerpiece of the whole display. I presented a case for why I was town. I offered why it was possible I was scum, but went to great lengths in order to explain why I wasn't. For me, the link was just a way to top it off.

I saw no advantage in having brought the knowledge in. My case was presented, so I was already in a good place. The advantage was already in my hands. I didn't need the link to turn my lynch around. (Regardless of whether you think that's true or not, you have to think of me at the time--I didn't THINK I would need the link.) So I posted it, not as an advantage to guarantee my lynch turned around, but as just the final piece of the puzzle saying I was town.

[Kublai Khan]

Mastin, you're doing a lot of justification dancing to try to claim innocence. Stop it.

The right thing to do was to alert the mod that part of his game was compromised and that you didn't feel comfortable hiding that information.
The wrong thing to do was to decide that you knew better than the mod and go ahead and use the infraction for personal gain.

Also,

Really, how come you seem to think it was so explicit? That Cyber's words could only be interpreted in that single way? I, the guy in the slot of question, thought of at least half a dozen ways for it to be false, yet only a single scenario for it to be true.

I, the guy in the slot of question, didn't think that the single scenario was undeniably the most probable.

He could have, for instance, merely forgotten he was ever in this game. It's happened to plenty of scummers before. He could have lied for the sake of maintaining his slot's integrity this game. Why was the answer "he was telling the truth" the only one people other than me considered?

I'm sorry mastin, but you really, really suck at probability. Everyone but you who read that Cyber mafia QT blurb knew exactly what it implied and any scenario that didn't imply that you were town is so intensely improbable that it wasn't worth even bothering to consider.

And guess what? Everyone was right. You were confirmed town.

As I said in the dead QT, I already thought my argument for me being town was strong. The link was meant to be the final nail in the coffin. To augment the existing case. Not the centerpiece of the whole display. I presented a case for why I was town. I offered why it was possible I was scum, but went to great lengths in order to explain why I wasn't. For me, the link was just a way to top it off.

I'm still amazed that you've played over a hundred games and still do stuff like this. It's pointless. Any scum worth their salt can present a similar case as to why they are town with all pertinent links and what not. So why bother? Has it ever convinced anyone?

Your job as town is to find scum. If you want to avoid being lynched, then point out where the case on you is flawed. But to try to earnestly expect people to be convinced of your towniness just by saying stuff like "look at my posting here, isn't it very town?" is ludicrous.

[mastin2]

I'm still amazed that you've played over a hundred games and still do stuff like this. It's pointless. Any scum worth their salt can present a similar case as to why they are town with all pertinent links and what not. So why bother? Has it ever convinced anyone?

Your job as town is to find scum. If you want to avoid being lynched, then point out where the case on you is flawed. But to try to earnestly expect people to be convinced of your towniness just by saying stuff like "look at my posting here, isn't it very town?" is ludicrous.

Khan, I don't typically defend myself outside of lylo.

Granted, it wasn't lylo, but I was treating that day as if it was.

Lylo's a whole different beast from the rest of the game. I hate finding myself in there, much preferring to have died before then, so when I do get there, my play isn't exactly the strongest.


In lylo, I literally can

not

afford to have people thinking my "screw defense, I'm focusing on offense" attitude makes me scum. (See also--how jason treated Aco. Not quite the same, but it's the same principle.)

Outside of lylo, yeah. The best defense is a really, really good offense. I focus on lynching scum, and generally, am seen (rightfully so) as town for it. I learned my lesson pretty much two or three years ago on that, that I shouldn't be focused on defense.
But lylo is a whole different beast. If you're lynched, you lose. Not only that, but in lylo, you have to ask yourself why you're there...and that introduces a critical level of doubt. You can't afford to go in guns-a-blazing and have an all-out offense, in the (very likely) case that you're wrong on some (or all) of your reads.

During which time, you're vulnerable. If you don't have any offense, and you don't raise a good defense, you're going to get lynched.
I was still working on hammering out my reads--meaning, my offense was lacking.
I had plenty of suspicion on me, which offense was likely not going to help relieve--meaning, I needed something else.

When offense fails, the only real choice is to go on the defense for a while, which is exactly what I was doing: buying myself some time to solidify myself reads-wise.

And often-times, defense is a good way to lead into offense--by getting people's reactions off of my defense (whether they buy it, attack it, nitpick every detail in it, are skeptical, etc.), I can very often help solidify my reads. Making a defense act as a very low-tier reaction test.


tl;dr, in lylo, I don't push an offense I am unsure of (if I don't believe it, how are

they

supposed to?), I gather my reads, and address concerns of other players on me, to help gauge their alignment and to hopefully put their minds at rest as to my alignment.

[Kublai Khan]

That critical level of doubt is why it's pointless to present a case as to why you're town. Anyone in the game can cherry-pick their towniest posts and present them as a reason why they are town. That's why it's a pointless exercise and a waste of time.

But add in the word of your predecessor who implies beyond a reasonable doubt that he's town in this game, and you're confirmed.

[mastin2]

That critical level of doubt is why it's pointless to present a case as to why you're town.

Quite the opposite, in my experience.

That critical level of doubt is why there's a point in presenting a case as to why you're town at all.

Your words hold actual power in lylo. The goals of scum and town may be nearly identical, and it's true that they can cherry-pick arguments...but the vital part of it is in two closely-tied factors:
-Their presentation, and
-Their overall picture.

If their presentation looks like it was cherry picking, chances are high they're reaching, especially if you look and find that it doesn't match the overall picture. (Such as, "X called me town here." When X had been consistently calling that player scum throughout the game, both before and ESPECIALLY after the quote in question.)
If their presentation presents the broader perspective of things, describing the general trends, then it's generally much more effective.

A town player in lylo has, above all other aspects, the ability to check the facts being claimed. A good town player won't half-ass it, and will see that a statement used in a case may be

technically

true (especially in isolation), but when put into context and/or the overall picture it doesn't hold weight.
And a good town player can therefore make a judgment on what has been said, both in offense and in defense.


...Essentially, though the words themselves in lylo may not be that important (scum and town both have the same motive: not to die), the presentation of them and the facts they bring to light are key, especially in a longer game with a lot to review.

And as I said before...A solid defense not only gives a town player much to think about (as they go see how much merit it has), but also offers the defending player (if town) to gauge how others are reacting to the defense. Are they looking into it? Do they buy it without question? Are they skeptical? Are they dismissive of it? Are they nitpicking every detail of it? All of those (especially if you have a grasp on the player and their attitude as town/scum/general) are HUGE in reading alignment. (Though in general, town players are both lazy and proactive, whereas scum players are active but reactive to it.)

[Kublai Khan]

You're ignoring the problem of confirmation bias.

[mastin2]

You're ignoring the problem of confirmation bias.

Which throws out the "critical element of doubt" part.

If a town player has confirmation bias on another town player, the game's been lost. Plain and simple. If there is no role-based way to clear the suspected player, then nothing the player can say will do anything. Everything they say will be twisted to match the biased read, with the evidence morphing to fit.

If a town player lacks said confirmation bias, then by definition they have the critical element of doubt. Even if they're 95% certain of their read, the willingness to hear the evidence is what makes all the difference. And this is where the presentation comes in. Strong offense is a good start (especially if you are confident in your scumread), but the best case in lylo not only shows why who you're voting is scum, but also why you are NOT scum.

If the town player suspicious of you has confirmation bias, the loss is on their shoulders, not yours.
If the town player suspicious of you listens, weighs the evidence, and ultimately decides not to change their decision, then it depends; it's generally both your faults, them for having not analyzed things as well as they could (but there's hope for them yet, and they can learn from it), and you for not having presented things as well as you could (but you're on the right track and merely need to refine your technique). Obviously, it can be entirely their fault, but it's typically a bad idea to assume so without great justification.
If the town player suspicious of you listens, reads the evidence, and makes a correct read off of it...then the defense paid off.

Close-mindedness causes the death of far too many towns. (This one included. *coughcoughjasononacocougcough* ) But assuming you're not facing close-minded individuals (and that's an assumption you should always make!), you need to address them. Not showing why they're wrong (dismantling a case against you is a good way to reinforce the case in their minds ), but showing why you're town.

They sound the same, but the subtle difference between them makes all the difference.

That's one aspect of lylo which remains the same--you never, ever want to tell a player that they're wrong about everything; you'll end up antagonizing them. (Which in lylo, ensures you get lynched. )
You want to convince them why you're right, why you are town and Player X is scum.

The goal here isn't to dissuade them from a lynch, but persuade them onto a lynch. Similar concepts, but they make all the difference.